If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Re: NFL Draft Watch: The Race for Luck

I'm not saying you don't have to have a good QB to win. I'm saying you can get a good QB in a lot of other places other than taking them with the #1 pick.

Out of the top QBs in the NFL right now, how many are former #1 picks? Peyton Manning, and that's it.

The Colts will be able to find a good to great QB else where.

Swapping out PM for Andrew Luck does nothing to address the real problems of the team. The QB position is pretty far down on the list. Sam Bradford isn't working out to well right now.

Technically its Peyton and Eli but whatever it works both ways.

How many current superbowl Qbs were drafted with the 33rd overall pick. One..

How many with the 24th overall pick? One

How many with the 11th overall pick? One

How many with the 199 overall pick? One

How many teams reached for Qb's in the draft last year? Plenty...and the Colts would be one of them if they didn't have PM.

ITs a LOT harder to find a good Qb with lower draft selection than it is at a higher one and for every Alex Smith Jamarcus Russell in weak drafts theres a Cam Newton or a Stafford in a strong draft class. This is a strong draft and a good year to have the overall number one pick. We aren't arguing over Tim Couch or Alex Smith.

IF there wasn't a clear number one overall pick then I wouldn't be so passionate about it but clearly Luck is the best prospect to comeout in a long time.

As far as swapping Luck for PM does not do a thing for the team....WHAT? OF course it does! It saves you a ton of money over 4 years. Money that can be spent in FA or on your own guys like Pat Anger.

The Colts for the past decade or so have been around the middle in team salary and had the highest team salary in 06. To say that they have enough money to retain Mathis, Wayne, Garcon and whoever else I am forgetting is just wrong.

The team salary fluctuates greatly so I don't look at that 15 million as money in the bank. To show you how this works in 05 we had 77 million (bottom half) in team salary. In 06 we had 131 mill (the highest) and in 07 we had 102 mill the upper half in team salary.

Retaining Manning is a no brainer and of course Irsay is going to say that but thats not where your argument lies. What about the other guys? Has Irsay said that they will keep Wayne, Garcon and Mathis? If he has I haven't heard that sound bite but my gut tells me he hasn't said anything about those 3.

TO me the best course of action given the injury concerns, the age, and the likely hood that the Colts won't come across another great prospect is to simply keep both raise Mannings value trade him down the road for picks and or players and keep Luck.

To free up some cash to do that I fully expect Bracket to be gone along with Addai and possibly Bullit.

Edit: The funny thing is that Irsay said he wouldn't hesistate to take a "great young qb in the draft'. I wonder who that would be?

Also from the horses mouth..

"Obviously I'm concerned that we came out and lost 13 games. We'll probably be $8 million cash over cap; we're up around $130 [million] in spending. It's not like we planned on a rebuilding year.

Re: NFL Draft Watch: The Race for Luck

Oh I am?

"You get people who are smart, tough, with strong work ethics," he says. "And you want those who feel that football is important to them." The Colts, Super Bowl champions in 2006-2007, are 39-9 over the past three years despite a payroll that was the fifth-lowest in the NFL over that span. That makes Polian the NFL's top general manager by a landslide.

Re: NFL Draft Watch: The Race for Luck

For someone who accuses me of ignoring what you wrote, I would think you'd know the difference between USA today, and a link to Forbes. Especially when the qoute I posted is from Bill Polian himself....

Re: NFL Draft Watch: The Race for Luck

And now it's really rich. You're going to use an article to try and show that money is going to be an issue moving forward when it say's this?

But what if the Colts are presented with the dual option of Manning and Luck? The Colts are on the hook for a $28 million option payment to Manning at the beginning of the 2012 league year as part of the five-year, $90 million contract extension he signed in July. Even with the new rookie wage scale, the Colts could be in a position where an abnormally high percentage of their 2012 salary cap would be taken up by the quarterback position … and last time we checked, there probably wasn't a provision in the playbook for Manning and Luck to see the field at the same time.

"I don't see that being the issue; I paid him $26 million this year — he didn't play," Irsay said of Manning. "I knew it was an iffy situation going in. In terms of if he's healthy and if he's ready to play, I see him back with us. The draft will be what the draft is; there are a lot of situations that can unfold from here. If there is a great young quarterback there, we wouldn't hesitate to take him."

I would think that you wouldn't use a source that directly conflicts with what you're saying.

Re: NFL Draft Watch: The Race for Luck

For someone who accuses me of ignoring what you wrote, I would think you'd know the difference between USA today, and a link to Forbes. Especially when the qoute I posted is from Bill Polian himself....

I might be blind but I see this...

"You get people who are smart, tough, with strong work ethics," he says. "And you want those who feel that football is important to them." The Colts, Super Bowl champions in 2006-2007, are 39-9 over the past three years despite a payroll that was the fifth-lowest in the NFL over that span.

Thats an end quote no? So did Polain SAY despite a payroll that was the fifth-lowest in the NFL over that span. I don't see quotes at the end of this sentence...

Money IS an issue with a Hard cap in the NFL PERIOD. For Irsay its not an issue to pay Manning to sit but for the TEAM and Polain it is...

Re: NFL Draft Watch: The Race for Luck

So you use their words when they say they won't hestitate to draft a QB but yet you won't use their words when talking about the financial ramifications of doing so.

Interesting.

And I didn't say the fifth lowest payroll part was the quote from Polian. I'm meaning that USA Today often times relies on unnamed "sources" whereas this article is pulling direct quotes from Bill Polian himself.

But please, continue comparing Forbes with gossip rags that talk about Kim Kardashian.

Re: NFL Draft Watch: The Race for Luck

So you use their words when they say they won't hestitate to draft a QB but yet you won't use their words when talking about the financial ramifications of doing so.

Interesting.

And I didn't say the fifth lowest payroll part was the quote from Polian. I'm meaning that USA Today often times relies on unnamed "sources" whereas this article is pulling direct quotes from Bill Polian himself.

But please, continue comparing Forbes with gossip rags that talk about Kim Kardashian.

Irsay isn't talking about the finacial ramifications against the cap.. He's talking about the finacial ramifications of his pocket book.

Notice Irsay didn't use the 16 million Manning cost against the salary cap he used the full 26 million paid to him this year to sit and heal.

I fully expect Irsay to spend the money for Manning but there is a ceiling to what he is allowed to spend. He can't ignore the hard cap and he will have to make a decision sooner or later on Luck and Manning.

But please, continue comparing Forbes with gossip rags that talk about Kim Kardashian.

Whats this sound like to you......

Then recently, Humphries’ marriage to Kardashian was over – 72 days after it started. Then came the speculation: Was the marriage fake all along? Was Kim really caught in a nude Yoga session with a male instructor in their home? It’s all created enough tabloid fatigue for the public, when asked which player in the NBA they most dislike, now choose Humphries’ name before any other. TOM VAN Riper

Re: NFL Draft Watch: The Race for Luck

I don't forget, I just think it's absurd to try and argue that Irsay doesn't understand the cap ramificications and is only thinking about his pocketbook.

Combine that with you trying to tell me that I'm wrong about their historical cap situations when I use a source that is getting it's information straight from Bill Polian himself, and then trying to compare Forbes to some tabloid piece of crap.

I find it funny that I am the pessimist when I don't think the Colts, or Bill Polian for that matter, has been as awful as most you. I'm also one of the only people to say I think Reggie Wayne would be back next year in the doom and gloom thread about Reggie's upcoming FA.

I mean seriously, I'm the optimist but yet I'm the pessimist? Yeah, that makes a lot of sense.

No crap it's going to cost other players. Whenever you give money to one player, it takes money away from others. But there are 53 men on the roster. The Colts have never been shy about paying money to those they deemed worthy enough of getting paid. Which is why DFree was one of the higest paid defensive players in the NFL and then why Bob Sanders got a huge payday, all while they were paying Peyton, Marvin, and Reggie.

If they could work out the cap structure when they had those 5 guys getting massive paydays, I'm more than positive they can do it again.

Re: NFL Draft Watch: The Race for Luck

I don't forget, I just think it's absurd to try and argue that Irsay doesn't understand the cap ramificications and is only thinking about his pocketbook.

Combine that with you trying to tell me that I'm wrong about their historical cap situations when I use a source that is getting it's information straight from Bill Polian himself, and then trying to compare Forbes to some tabloid piece of crap.

I find it funny that I am the pessimist when I don't think the Colts, or Bill Polian for that matter, has been as awful as most you. I'm also one of the only people to say I think Reggie Wayne would be back next year in the doom and gloom thread about Reggie's upcoming FA.

I mean seriously, I'm the optimist but yet I'm the pessimist? Yeah, that makes a lot of sense.

No crap it's going to cost other players. Whenever you give money to one player, it takes money away from others. But there are 53 men on the roster. The Colts have never been shy about paying money to those they deemed worthy enough of getting paid. Which is why DFree was one of the higest paid defensive players in the NFL and then why Bob Sanders got a huge payday, all while they were paying Peyton, Marvin, and Reggie.

If they could work out the cap structure when they had those 5 guys getting massive paydays, I'm more than positive they can do it again.

But I'm the pessimist in this discussion....

EDIT: And Mathis. They didn't short change him either.

Heres how wrong you are. That forbes article quote covers 3 years... That certainly doesn't imply the historical low salary cap claim you are making and it doesn't mean that they have always been on the bottom of the salary cap floor.

I am glad you favor Forbes over USA Today but one has a quote that covers over 3 years and the other has actual numbers for each team.

Either way it doesn't matter because if they do decide to keep both then you'll be proven wrong on that plenty of money comment. And even if they just decide to keep Manning you'll be wrong.

Re: NFL Draft Watch: The Race for Luck

It's pointless to argue with someone who thinks they know the financial implications of the NFL better than the owner and GM, who have been doing this exact things for the past 30 years.

I hope you send out your resume, because if you know how to construct a team better than Bill Polian, who Forbes ranks as the best GM in football, then you are certainly a guaranteed HOF GM.

This sounds like someone who has lost an argument and for the record I said they could keep both but they won't be able to have plenty of money for their FA's like Wayne, Mathis, Garcon. Some big time names won't be here next year..

Also Polain disagrees with trading down in this draft.. Something that you thought was a good idea.

“I can’t imagine that there are players that we could afford under the salary cap that would come in and help our team, veteran players that would be available in such a trade. And if you traded it for picks, which you probably would be wise to do, those picks would be very high picks, the highest picks perhaps, in a lot of future years, which means that they wouldn’t be on the team in the short run.

“Somehow or other, that theory, people have asked me about that, but it doesn’t hold water with me. I don’t know what you get out of it. If you’re assuming that you trade one of the top three picks in the draft for a bunch of second- and third-rounders in that same draft, I don’t buy that one at all.”

Re: NFL Draft Watch: The Race for Luck

Re: NFL Draft Watch: The Race for Luck

Sounds like I've lost? How do I "win" with a guy who claims that Jim Irsay doesn't know what he's talking about?

Or how Forbes magazine is now on par with tabloids?
Or how I'm a pessimist for the sole reason that I don't think Luck will be willing to sit on the bench for two years?
Or how your argue semantics on what consitutes as "historial" or not?

You've accused me of purposely ignoring what you've said and purposely distorting what you've said.

How am I supposed to "win" any argument with someone who relies on personal rebuttals and absolute crackpot theories about knowing more than the owner of the team?

Reread Polians quote.

I don’t know what you get out of it. If you’re assuming that you trade one of the top three picks in the draft for a bunch of second- and third-rounders in that same draft, I don’t buy that one at all

Is that what I'm arguing, that the Colts would trade their first round pick for a bunch of second and third round picks in this same very draft?

For someone who accuses me of purposefully distorting and ignoring your arguments, you sure have ignored or distorted my argument......

I bring up a quote from Jim Irsay saying money isn't going to be a problem, and point out that Polian has said the same things. You don't believe them, and think you know more about them.

But then you find quotes to try and discredit what I'm saying, that don't even address what I'm saying, and suddenly they have credibility in your eyes.

Either they don't know what they're talking about or they do. You can't up and decide that their clueless about how the salary would work out, and then try to argue that they're helping your point all in a couple of minutes.

If your desire is just to "win" then congrats. You've won. If your desire is to talk about football, then we can continue.

Re: NFL Draft Watch: The Race for Luck

Sounds like I've lost? How do I "win" with a guy who claims that Jim Irsay doesn't know what he's talking about?
.

Show me where I have said that Jim Irsay doesn't know what he talking about?

You accuse me of that but you know I never said that. You just like to twist things up because your arguments are weak and filled with fallacies.

I believe he will pay Peyton and draft Luck if we get the top pick.. Mind you this is something I wanted all along..

And I did say he is fine with paying Peyton but he will still have to work it out under the salary cap and the Colts wont' have plenty of money to sign their FA's. Some big names will have to leave in order to make this work. You how ever don't believe this for some illogical reason.

I believe the FO when the say they have spent 130 million this year which doesn't sound like the bottom of the salary cap which you would have us believe. In fact 130 mill is at the max if you follow the new CBA but don't get caught up on facts because they just seem to get in your way of making a point.

Edit: And this is the quote you should be reading.

And if you traded it for picks, which you probably would be wise to do, those picks would be very high picks, the highest picks perhaps, in a lot of future years, which means that they wouldn’t be on the team in the short run.

He's not going to trade this pick because the picks would be 2-3 years away when Peyton is near 40.

It's like you think they only assess the season at hand and don't look towards next year or something.

But whatever. Now you're going to try and claim you didn't say those things I guess.

I think they reevaluate (one of Polains favorite words) the season and I believe they didn't think they would be in this position to draft Luck.

Do you think Polain thought that he would get the number one overall pick when the season started? I don't think he was planning on it and this quote proves my point..

It's not like we planned on a rebuilding year

They weren't planning on a rebuilding year but they got one and my best guess is that they franchise tag Wayne or Mathis and draft a WR/DLE in the second round. I also think they planned on replacing Mathis with Jerry Hughes, Addai with Donald Brown and Charlie Johnson with AC. The only big fail on that list is Hughes so they are in a pickle when it comes to his salary.

Like I said they will probably cut Brackett, Addai and possibly Bullit to re-sign Wayne and/or Mathis but they will still will have to save some money back if they want to re-sign Freeney in 2013.

And you still have Garcon to pay and if you don't you won't have a guy to stretch the field.

So no I don't think they know which FA they can bring back and which they can't and thats just like in years past with other Colts FA see Jeff Saturday for an example.

Re: NFL Draft Watch: The Race for Luck

What "issues" do you think arise from signing a rookie, especially since the new CBA just got the out of control rookie pay under control?

The "issues" he's talking about are the entire salary "issues" and not just singling out Andrew Luck, who's going to get similiar money their first round draft pick was going to get anyways.

Whether or not they draft Andrew Luck isn't going to change their cap situation very much, considering that money is either going to go to Luck or to some other player. It's not like they have the option of just not drafting anyone. They do have that option, obviously, but it's not a very realistic option worth discussing.

You honestly think their going to talk about financial issues that keeping Manning might present and their only talking about PM and Andrew Luck? Goodness.

EDIT: If Irsay is so shortsighted that he can only think about the cap ramifications and how it only affects two players, then the Colts are going to be needing a new owner pretty soon. It's a wonder how he hasn't gone broke yet, seeing as how he's just clearly incapable of planning ahead.

Re: NFL Draft Watch: The Race for Luck

What "issues" do you think arise from signing a rookie, especially since the new CBA just got the out of control rookie pay under control?

The "issues" he's talking about are the entire salary "issues" and not just singling out Andrew Luck, who's going to get similiar money their first round draft pick was going to get anyways.

Whether or not they draft Andrew Luck isn't going to change their cap situation very much, considering that money is either going to go to Luck or to some other player. It's not like they have the option of just not drafting anyone. They do have that option, obviously, but it's not a very realistic option worth discussing.

You honestly think their going to talk about financial issues that keeping Manning might present and their only talking about PM and Andrew Luck? Goodness.

EDIT: If Irsay is so shortsighted that he can only think about the cap ramifications and how it only affects two players, then the Colts are going to be needing a new owner pretty soon. It's a wonder how he hasn't gone broke yet, seeing as how he's just clearly incapable of planning ahead.

There is not much of an issue of signing a guy like Luck but do you think they would have signed a QB in the first round if they didn't have the first overall pick?

My guess is that they would have taken a WR or a DE to replace Wayne, Garcon or Mathis with the third pick or whatever the pick would have been.

Thats where the "issue" comes from and thats why it will be harder to retain one of the top FA's the Colts have if they draft Luck.

I would bet they could save a ton of money if they got the 3rd-10th pick and was able to let go of Mathis or Wayne because they got a stud rookie in the first round to take their place.

If they draft Luck they won't be able to do that AND they will have roughly 1/5 of the salary cap money going to the QB's alone.

See the issue?

On top of that if they use the franchise tag (10 mill) on either Wayne or Mathis it will all count against the cap that year and won't be spread out. That means in 3 positions roughly 30 percent of the cap is used up and you only spending it on 2 starters.

That tag would be a 7 million dollar raise for Mathis and a 4 million dollar raise for Wayne and the funnly thing is that neither of them would want it..

There is a reason why they don't re-sign guys every year and its not becuase they don't value them. Its because they can't afford to keep them due to the salary cap.

Polain has said so many times and the draft is the Colts way of getting good talent to replace their current players like AC replaced Johnson this year.

If they are already at the salary cap max right now and have all the FA's that they have where do you think this money is going to come from. Kerry Collins 4 million will be off the books but your replacing that with a 6 million dollar backup Qb in Luck.

Re: NFL Draft Watch: The Race for Luck

No, I don't see the issue, because when he was freaking asked they weren't talking about the 3-10 picks, they were talking about Andrew Freaking Luck.

The question wasn't about the draft pick, the question was "Is there going to be any money issues if you have both Peyton and Andrew" or something similiar. That is the topic. A draft pick isn't the topic.

Do you really think PM is going to come back for a couple of years to the Colts, who aren't even interested in re-signing their top FAs? If the Colts aren't willing to re-sign Reggie what message do you think that would send?

Probably that they're going to be in complete rebuild mode. Now why would PM come back, to the Colts, so he can lead a rebuilding charge for two stinking years while Luck sat the bench?

If they're not going to re-sign Reggie, and the other FA, then it would be best for them to trade Manning and start the rebuilding process with your QB under center so he can learn with this teammates, rather than wasting two years of Manning's time.

If he comes back to Indy, they're going to try to win from Day 1. It doesn't make any sense not too.

But getting back to the original issue. Do you really think that we're smart enough to talk about these "issues" but Jim Irsay who has ran a football team for the past 15+ years, and has been around the Colts probably for his entire life, isn't capable of thinking about these things either?

So he's just going to open up his mouth and say there aren't any "issues" when he hasn't thought past next week? Get out of here.